There is a story running on the CNN page about how a Vegan magazine that had been illustrating photos that have now been found to include meat. There is a photo of Chicken stew that was re-used in the magazine indicating it was vegan.

Raises the question about truth in media and advertising. When photo shoots are done, how much of it is 'real' in the final product? Watching the 'September Issue', Wintour's honest account and indirect response to 'The Devil...' there is plenty of discussion about what photos stay and go and how a wig needs to be brought in because the real hair does not look good after a bad cut. Push up this, real in that, puff up this and minimize lines on photo shop. Does soy look as sexy as chicken? Does cropping the hair off a model or bone off a spare rib make a difference? They say sex sells. We all want something different. Vegans want no bones, no eggs cheese or milk.

It lies within the consumer's eye and our decision to buy the product and magazine. With 1 million in circulation, VegNews takes some risk slipping in a little chicken where there should be soy. In the end, it is up to the readers to decide whether or not they continue to buy the magazine. It is a choice, one we make each day.

And to Ms. Quarry Girl who has her 'barf bag' popped and ready for use - your controversal post may not have put food on your table, but it stirred up plenty of PR for this magazine! And on some level, they are thanking you.